The Happiest Place on Earth

...despite relatively low life expectancy, a literacy rate of just 47%, and a very low GDP per capita. Why? Researchers credit an unusually strong sense of national identity. Plus, the country has beautiful scenery and a largely unspoiled culture, thanks to strict governmental limits on tourism, development, and immigration. Pretty counterintuitive, but Bhutan seems to have found a recipe for happiness.

In 1999, the government lifted a ban on television and the Internet, making Bhutan one of the last countries to introduce television. In his speech, the King said that television was a critical step to the modernisation of Bhutan as well as a major contributor to the country's Gross National Happiness (Bhutan is the only country to measure happiness),[39] but warned that the "misuse" of television could erode traditional Bhutanese values.[40]

I wonder what the multiculturalists and technocrats have to say about this.

Openly they would be eternal skeptics asking for studies and statistics proving the Happiest Place assertion, then constantly denying any valid evidence was given. Secretly, they would be terrified that if identitarian traditionalist life looked better to people, they would be out of their useless parasite jobs in short order.

1) Since when did happiness suppose value?2) Looks like a sub-standard South Asian culture, like many others. Good on them for resisting the disease of modernity, but in comparison to actual civilization (renaissance Italy or Persia, for example) this 'shangra-la' is nothing but a speck of dust.

1) Since when did happiness suppose value?2) Looks like a sub-standard South Asian culture, like many others. Good on them for resisting the disease of modernity, but in comparison to actual civilization (renaissance Italy or Persia, for example) this 'shangra-la' is nothing but a speck of dust.

A culture's value is not determined by its material accomplishments, although these may reveal something of that culture. Of what value is a culture if it doesn't benefit individuals?

1) Since when did happiness suppose value?2) Looks like a sub-standard South Asian culture, like many others. Good on them for resisting the disease of modernity, but in comparison to actual civilization (renaissance Italy or Persia, for example) this 'shangra-la' is nothing but a speck of dust.

A culture's value is not determined by its material accomplishments, although these may reveal something of that culture. Of what value is a culture if it doesn't benefit individuals?

Culture is merely a collection of material accomplishments; architecture, goods, fashion, literature, art etc.. All of these benefit individuals by making them cultured.

1) Since when did happiness suppose value?2) Looks like a sub-standard South Asian culture, like many others. Good on them for resisting the disease of modernity, but in comparison to actual civilization (renaissance Italy or Persia, for example) this 'shangra-la' is nothing but a speck of dust.

A culture's value is not determined by its material accomplishments, although these may reveal something of that culture. Of what value is a culture if it doesn't benefit individuals?

Culture is merely a collection of material accomplishments; architecture, goods, fashion, literature, art etc.. All of these benefit individuals by making them cultured.